Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 304

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 10 of the 10 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Serum, tissue and body fluid concentrations of tigecycline after a single 100 mg dose

Rodvold, K. A., Gotfried, M. H., Cwik, M., Korth-Bradley, J. M., Dukart, G., Ellis-Grosse, E. J.·2006·Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to determine the tissue and corresponding serum concentration of tigecycline at selected time points in gall bladder, bile, colon, bone, synovial fluid (SF), lung and CSF in subjects undergoing surgical or medical procedures. METHODS: One hundred and four adult subjects (aged 24-83 years; 64 women, 40 men) received a single intravenous (i.v.) dose of tigecycline (100 mg infused over 30 min). Subjects were randomly assigned to one of four collection times at 4, 8, 12 and 24 h after the start of the infusion. For CSF, samples were collected at approximately 1.5 and 24 h after the start of the infusion. All subjects had serum samples collected before the administration of tigecycline, at the end of the infusion and at the time corresponding to tissue or body fluid collection. Drug concentrations in serum, tissues and body fluids were determined by LC/MS/MS. The area under the mean concentration-time curve from 0 to 24 h (AUC(0-24)) was determined for the comparison of systemic exposure between tissue or body fluid to serum. RESULTS: The mean serum concentrations of tigecycline were similar to those previously published. Tissue penetration, expressed as the ratio of AUC(0-24) in tissue or body fluid to serum, was 537 for bile, 23 for gall bladder, 2.6 for colon, 2.0 for lung, 0.41 for bone, 0.31 for SF and 0.11 for CSF. CONCLUSIONS: A single 100 mg dose of intravenous tigecycline produced considerably higher tissue/fluid concentrations in bile, gall bladder, colon and lung compared with simultaneous serum concentrations. On average, the systemic exposure of tigecycline in bone, SF and CSF ranged from 11% to 41% of serum concentrations. The results in bone are inconsistent with previous radiolabelled studies in animals and it is unclear if tight binding to bone (versus low bone uptake) or poor extraction of tigecycline for LC/MS/MS detection or both may have contributed to the differences we observed in humans.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/jac/dkl403

Cites

10 of 10 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 10 references

Cited by

See all 304

Metadata

Authors
Rodvold, K. A., Gotfried, M. H., Cwik, M., Korth-Bradley, J. M., Dukart, G., & Ellis-Grosse, E. J.
Venue
Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy
Published
2006-10-20
Volume
58
Issue
6
Pages
1221-1229
ISSN
  • 0305-7453 (ISSN-L)
  • 1460-2091
OpenAlex
W2135458987
Cited by
304
References
10
FWCI
10.57
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Serum, tissue and body fluid concentrations of tigecycline after a single 100 mg dose. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/jac/dkl403
The paper
Rodvold, K. A., Gotfried, M. H., Cwik, M., Korth-Bradley, J. M., Dukart, G., & Ellis-Grosse, E. J. (2006). Serum, tissue and body fluid concentrations of tigecycline after a single 100 mg dose. Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy. https://doi.org/10.1093/jac/dkl403

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.